Protect Owners by Using a Qualifications-Based Selection Process

Transcription

1 Protect Owners by Using a Qualifications-Based Selection Process Presenter: Ron Brenke, PE QBS Manager For: Michigan Association of Municipal Attorneys Lansing Center April 5, 2011

2 QBS Coalition in Michigan Formed in 1987 as a result of House Resolution No. 206 ACEC AIA ASCE ASLA APWA AGC ESD MSPE MSPS MWEA American Council of Engineering Companies American Institute of Architects American Society of Civil Engineers American Society of Landscape Architects American Public Works Association Associated General Contractors Engineering Society of Detroit Michigan Society of Professional Engineers Michigan Society of Professional Surveyors Michigan Water Environment Association

3 What is QBS? A nationally endorsed procedure for selecting and retaining design professionals (Architects and Engineers) that will provide the best value to the owner in terms of quality and total project cost. A competitive procurement approach that emphasizes quality attributes.

4 A/E Services We are not talking about purchasing commodities! Design Professionals provide: Technical Expertise Innovation Latest Technology High Degree of Professional Competence

5 APWA Statement of Position APWA believes that the public interest is best served when governmental agencies select architects, engineers, and related professional services and technical consultants for projects and studies through Qualifications-Based Selection (QBS) procedures as opposed to price. Excerpt from APWA Red Book on QBS Selection (August 2006)

6 APWA Statement of Position Basing selections on qualifications and competence, rather than price, fosters greater creativity and flexibility, and minimizes the potential for disputes and litigation. Excerpt from APWA Red Book on QBS Selection (August 2006)

7 Why not use Low Bid? To those not familiar with the A/E industry, low-bid may seem logical

8 The Reality of Bidding Low-bidding often leads to inferior results and actually increases overall project costs.

9 Professional fees usually represent only 1 percent to 2 percent of a project s life cycle cost. Most consultants create savings or quality improvements, which more than offset their fees through their expertise and creativity. Excerpt from APWA Red Book on QBS Selection (August 2006)

10 Federal and State Guidelines

11 Federal Brooks Act In 1972, Congress established a federal law, known as the Brooks Act (P.L ), which required the selection of architects and engineers on the basis of their qualifications, subject to the negotiation of a fair compensation for the services.

12 Status of QBS Statutes by State

13 Michigan In 1987 Legislature approved Concurrent Resolution No. 206 urging state and local agencies to utilize QBS processes for selection of design professionals. In 2002, P.A. 504 was adopted. This statute requires the Department of Management and Budget to hire design professionals using a competitive QBS process.

14 QBS Supporters

15 Supporter Materials

16 National QBS Study

17 National QBS Study An analysis of issues pertaining to Qualifications- Based Selection. A national study developed at the request of the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) in collaboration with the American Public Works Association (APWA). Conducted by Paul S. Chinowsky, PhD, University of Colorado, and Gordon A. Kingsley, PhD, Georgia Institute of Technology, noted experts in public policy related to engineering and construction.

18 National QBS Study Study Motivation: National study had never been conducted To determine if QBS process was beneficial through a structured analysis Results would assist policy makers in filling the gap between anecdotal evidence of QBS and statistical evidence of QBS impact

19 National QBS Study Key Findings: QBS ensures cost-effectiveness QBS lowers risk for complex projects QBS results in better projects and highly satisfied owners QBS takes into account emerging societal issues QBS encourages innovation, protects intellectual property QBS supports owner capacity building

20 Recommended Selection Process

21 Recommended Selection Process 1. Develop Consultant Selection Policy 2. Owner identifies general scope of work and selection schedule 3. A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) is issued 4. Evaluate/short list qualified firms 5. Conduct interviews/rank the firms 6. Negotiate detailed scope of work and fee proposal with highest ranked firm 7. Advise all firms of the final selection

22 Other Available Resources:

23 Conclusions

24 Why QBS? Thorough Evaluation of Candidates QBS process offers the opportunity to select the most qualified professional by using a thorough and complete evaluation. Creates a Cooperative Relationship The QBS process puts client and consultant together before selection to ensure compatibility.

25 Why QBS? Clearly Defines & Improves Scope of Work Needs and wants of the client are clearly defined. Fosters innovation and creativity and eliminates assumptions and risk for both parties. Maximizes Quality & Value - Lowers Costs Process provides for open competition among consultants in the areas of personnel, experience and past performance. Reduces construction costs and delays. Results in a project with lower operation and maintenance costs.

26 Selection of Your Engineer The successful selection of a consultant is the most important decision in the success of a project The federal government and the majority of the states support the use of QBS as a straight forward, well documented, and defensible method to select a consultant to maximize the value of any public works project. Excerpts from APWA Red Book on QBS Selection (August 2006)

27 City of Howell-Sustainable Neighborhood

28 City of Ann Arbor-Huron Pkwy & Nixon Road Intersection Improvement

29 Paradise Valley Streetscape

30 Village of Northport-Wastewater Collection System

31 West Bloomfield Twp.-Water System Optimization

32 I-35 Bridge

33 Evaluation Criteria Quality (50 percent) Key individuals Quality Control / Quality Assurance Safety Performance in construction Aesthetics/Visual Quality (20 percent) Visual Enhancements Public Involvement Enhancements (15 percent) Roadway Structural Public Outreach/Involvement (15 percent) Impacts to the public Approach to communications

34 I-35 Bridge Formula: (Cost + (Time in days * $200,000))/Technical Score 337 to 437 Calendar Days Best-Value = Flatiron/Manson technical score $233.8 million cost 437 days to complete Other Proposals Costs Ranged From $177 to $219 Million Days Ranged From 367 to 437

35 Questions?

36 Thank You! QBS, Inc. Ron Brenke, PE 215 N. Walnut St. Lansing, MI Ph: